Journals / Göğüs Kalp Damar Anestezi ve Yoğun Bakım Derneği Dergisi / 2016 / Cilt: 22 - Sayı: 2

Our Heart Transplantation Results in Cases with and Without Mechanical Assist Device

Mekanik Destek Cihazı Olan ve Olmayan Olgularda Kalp Transplantasyonu Sonuçlarımız

Pages
70–74
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Thus, increasing rates of complications because of infection and bleeding also increase rates of morbidity and mortality.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Objective: Left ventricular assist devices (LVAD) give a chance to patients with end stage heart failure to wait until a suitable heart is found for cardiac transplantation.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Material and Methods: The medical records of the patients who had undergone transplantation without the aid of LVAD or after application of LVAD within the last 1.5 years by our hospital transplantation team were retrospectively reviewed.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Thus, increasing rates of complications because of infection and bleeding also increase rates of morbidity and mortality.
🔬Design:Review & Systematic Survey
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Objective: Left ventricular assist devices (LVAD) give a chance to patients with end stage heart failure to wait until a suitable heart is found for cardiac transplantation. However, transplantation procedure have some compelling conditions in patients with LVAD. In this study, we evaluated our cardiac transplantation patients with and without LVAD. Material and Methods: The medical records of the patients who had undergone transplantation without the aid of LVAD or after application of LVAD within the last 1.5 years by our hospital transplantation team were retrospectively reviewed. Data concerning type of LVAD used, time interval between implantation of LVAD and transplantation, morbidity, mortality and discharge data were obtained. Results: Ten patients who had undergone transplantation as a primary surgery and 12 patients who had undergone transplantation after implantation of LVAD were evaluated. Duration on LVAD varied between one day and one year. Five mortalities and one morbidity were detected in LVAD bridged group. All patients with primary transplantation and 7 patients with transplantation after LVAD were discharged without any complications. Discussion and Conclusion: There was a significantly higher mortality in LVAD bridged patients compare with primary transplantation group. Because of reoperation and hemolysis bleeding episodes are more frequently seen in LVAD patients. Infection rate is higher in the bridged patients due to the longer hospital stay, presence of driveline and prior cardiac surgery. Thus, increasing rates of complications because of infection and bleeding also increase rates of morbidity and mortality.

Özet

Amaç: Sol ventrikül mekanik destek cihazı (LVAD) yerleştirilmesi kalp nakli için uygun donör bulunana kadar hastalara bekleme şansı verir. Ancak LVAD'li hastalara yapılan transplantasyon prosedürünün bir takım zorlayıcı koşulları vardır. Bu sunumda doğrudan trasplantasyon ve LVAD sonrası transplantasyon yapılan olgularımızı değerlendirdik. Gereç ve Yöntem: Hastanemiz transplantasyon ekibince son 1,5 yıl içinde yapılan doğrudan transplantasyon uygulanan ve LVAD sonrası transplantasyon yapılan olgular geriye dö- nük incelendi. Kullanılan LVAD tipi, LVAD takıldıktan sonra transplantasyona kadar geçen süre, morbidite, mortalite ve taburculuk bilgileri edinildi. Bulgular: Doğrudan transplantasyon yapılan 10 hasta, LVAD sonrası transplantasyon yapılan 12 hasta değerlendirildi. LVAD süreleri 1 gün ila 1 yıl arasında değişmekteydi. LVAD sonrası transplantasyon yapılan 12 hastanın 5'inde mortalite ve 1'inde morbidite ile taburculuk saptandı. Bu grupta 7 hasta, doğrudan transplantasyon yapılan grupta ise 10 hasta sorunsuz taburcu oldu. Tartışma ve Sonuç: LVAD sonrası transplantasyon yapılan hasta grubunda doğrudan transplantasyon yapılanlara göre mortalite daha yüksek görüldü. LVAD hastalarında reoperasyon ve hemoliz nedeniyle kanama olasılığı artar. Hastanede yatış, açık kalp ameliyatı geçirmiş olma ve vucüdun dışına uzanan güç kablosu mevcudiyeti nedenleriyle infeksiyon olasılıkları yüksektir. İnfeksiyon ve kanamadan dolayı artan komplikasyonlar mortaliteyi ve morbiditeyi arttırmaktadır.

🔖

Cite This Article

SERT, G. S., AYKUT, A., BALCI, E., KEMERCİ, P., KOÇULU, R., DEMİR, A., ÖZGÖK, A., ÜNAL, E. U., SERT, D., KOCABEYOĞLU, S., KERVAN, Ü., PAÇ, M. (2016). Our Heart Transplantation Results in Cases with and Without Mechanical Assist Device. Göğüs Kalp Damar Anestezi ve Yoğun Bakım Derneği Dergisi, Cilt: 22 - Sayı: 2, 70–74. https://ajindex.com/articles/186411

References (11)

  1. Awad M, Czer LS, De Robertis MA, Mirocha J, Ruzza A, Rafiei M, et al. Adult heart transplantation following ventricular assist device implantation: early and late outcomes. Transplant Proc 2016;48:158-66.
  2. Patel S, Nicholson L, Cassidy CJ, Wong KY. Left ventricular assist device: a bridge to transplant or destination therapy? Postgrad Med J 2016 Mar 11.
  3. Lawlor BT, Ryan JW, Soucier RJ, Gluck JA. A survey of knowledge and perspectives of ventricular assist device therapy: evaluating the timing of advanced heart failure referral. Conn Med 2015;79:5-11
  4. Andrea G, Giuseppe B, Tiziano C, Maria F, Ettore V. Is fixed severe pulmonary hypertension still a contraindication to heart transplant in the modern era of mechanical circulatory support? A review. J Cardiovasc Med (Hagerstown) 2008;9:1059-62.
  5. Bhatia N, Voelkel AJ, Hussain Z, Sharma UC, Slaughter MS, Birks EJ, et al. Safety and feasibility of induction immunosuppression when driveline infection is an indication for cardiac transplantation. Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2015;63:675-83.
  6. Tong MZ, Smedira NG, Soltesz EG, Starling RC, Koval CE, Porepa L, et al. Outcomes of heart transplant after left ventricular assist device specific and related infection. Ann Thorac Surg 2015;100:1292-7.
  7. Susen S, Rauch A, Van Belle E, Vincentelli A, Lenting PJ. Circulatory support devices: fundamental aspects and clinical management of bleeding and thrombosis. J Thromb Haemost 2015;13:1757-67.
  8. Mohite PN, Maunz O, Simon AR. Pearls and pitfalls in short-term mechanical circulatory assist: how to avoid and manage complications. Artif Organs 2014;38:829- 37.
  9. Gaffey AC, Doll SL, Thomasson AM, Venkataraman C, Chen CW, Goldberg LR et al. Transplantation of "high-risk" donor hearts: Implications for infection. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2016 Jan 22. pii: S0022- 5223(16)00172-0.
  10. Stone ML, LaPar DJ, Benrashid E, Scalzo DC, Ailawadi G, Kron I, et al. Ventricular assist devices and increased blood product utilization for cardiac transplantation. J Card Surg 2015;30:194-200.
  11. Fukuhara S, Takeda K, Polanco AR, Takayama H, Naka Y.